Do you think the Iona Institute are homophobic?

RobertKK · 07-02-2014 02:24AM

Bannasidhe wrote: »

Are abortions especially prevalent among Lesbians which is why we are discussing it in a thread about whether or not Iona is homophobic?

Oh - and do you wish to admit you were wrong when you said the State didn't care if a marriage is consummated?

I don't know, but I don't think lesbians are the problem here.

The state won't care if you get married and stay married and never have sex together with the person you marry.
The state doesn't force married people to consummate their marriage. There are people who marry not due to love but for citizenship reasons and then use the divorce system to get out of it, maybe not the easiest in Ireland but it would be ignoring that not all marriages are consummated.

K-9 · 07-02-2014 02:27AM

RobertKK wrote: »

I suspect most cases of abortion by Irish women abroad is done because they don't want to have a baby, rather than being exceptional cases and will not want to have any remains to bring home.

So matter of factly! So easily dismissed! Moral self righteousness beats irrelevances like the concept of compassion and empathy. It's why I love this pope, no sanctimonious sermonising.

Babies brought back in card board boxes and suit cases don't matter a jot to you. You'll deny it, but you've just admitted they aren't that significant.

alaimacerc · 07-02-2014 02:31AM

RobertKK wrote: »

Two same sex friends could have a civil partnership or a SSM if introduced, for tax benefits for example.

Shades of the British Tory harumphing about equal marriage, suggesting he could marry his son as an inheritance tax dodge. Eeeeew.

So, again, sounds like your objection (du jour) is that it would be open to "bogus marriages". In much the same way that, uh, heterosexual marriage is. Really not see why you begin to think that any of this cuts any ice whatsoever.

SpaceTime · 07-02-2014 02:33AM

Bannasidhe wrote: »

Are abortions especially prevalent among Lesbians which is why we are discussing it in a thread about whether or not Iona is homophobic?

Oh - and do you wish to admit you were wrong when you said the State didn't care if a marriage is consummated?

It's the old strategy of link all things of a liberal nature together and find the one that pushes most buttons and gets the most reaction. If this debate were in the US, they'd probably throw in our overwhelming desire to ban guns too.

Remember that time Marge Simpson was campaigning against cartoon violence and was then discredited on TV because she wouldn't also support the totally unrelated issue of banning the Statue of David's tour of Springfield due to its nudiness.

Same ole same ole :P

alaimacerc · 07-02-2014 02:34AM

RobertKK wrote: »

The problem is if one says they are pro-choice it leaves it open given one can take anything from the term 'pro-choice'.

Depends on the "one" in question.

Pro-reproductive-rights-at-least-vaguely-in-line-with-every-other-developed-Western-country is a little bit of a mouthful, is the thing.

In any event, drifting further and further away from the topic at hand.

alaimacerc · 07-02-2014 02:38AM

RobertKK wrote: »

I suspect most cases of abortion by Irish women abroad is done because they don't want to have a baby, rather than being exceptional cases and will not want to have any remains to bring home.

There's been considerable public testimony by some of these "exceptions": cases of fatal foetal abnormality, for example. Are you unconcerned with these, or merely wishing to play divide-and-conquer between those "deserving" and those "undeserving" of your empathy?

RobertKK · 07-02-2014 02:43AM

K-9 wrote: »

So matter of factly! So easily dismissed! Moral self righteousness beats irrelevances like the concept of compassion and empathy. It's why I love this pope, no sanctimonious sermonising.

Babies brought back in card board boxes and suit cases don't matter a jot to you. You'll deny it, but you've just admitted they aren't that significant.

I did not say that. You are the one jumping to conclusions.

Are you going to claim every Irish woman who has an abortion abroad wants to bring the remains back home?
I think some women do, but I think most don't, that is an opinion, then you talk about being "matter of factly"

I hadn't denied anything, you are very quick to judge in this case.

RobertKK · 07-02-2014 02:44AM

Doctor Jimbob wrote: »

I'd say the problem here is fairly obvious to most people.

Your post, which is attack the poster, not the post.

alaimacerc · 07-02-2014 02:47AM

RobertKK wrote: »

I just wonder as it is the same people thanking eachother in this thread, time and time again

Jealous, much?

Look at it this way: it's easier on the ol' BB DB than all of us posting the same message every time saying "you're right, DQ is still an eejit, PM is still a troll, and RKK still keeps making leaden-footed attempts to deflect away from the issues, raising ever more tangential sidetracks, and failing to deal with even the most basic followup from his own rapidly-crashing kite-flying exercises."

and I just wonder if the same people who thank eachother also have the same opinion in regards to abortion.

And... why? And what brings on this sudden urge to share this thought?

RobertKK · 07-02-2014 02:49AM

alaimacerc wrote: »

There's been considerable public testimony by some of these "exceptions": cases of fatal foetal abnormality, for example. Are you unconcerned with these, or merely wishing to play divide-and-conquer between those "deserving" and those "undeserving" of your empathy?

Most abortions have nothing to do with health problems, but you and others can choose specific cases and apply them to all and believe that every Irish woman who went abroad for an abortion had health problems and wanted to bring her unborn home.
Some had health problems and never would have aborted in normal circumstances and they want to bring the remains of their unborn home, but to blanket all is just ridiculous.
Not all women want to bring the remains home.

Wildlife Actor · 07-02-2014 02:49AM

I was going to post something incredibly long and insightful but decided not to make this overlong thread even longer. Trusting this is preferable.

Yours etc.

LnM

Turtwig · 07-02-2014 02:53AM

Doctor Jimbob wrote: »

Fantastic stuff. Any chance of a comment on the actual topic of the thread though?

Ah but don't you see the correlation. The number of openly gay people in this country increases. The laws on them relax. Now we've got really bad weather, abortion on demand and economic recession!

Clearly, you cannot give gheys rights. Although, now if we're being honest, this all was set in motion when women were given the right to vote and were no longer confined to not knowing the meaning of the offside rule.

RobertKK · 07-02-2014 02:53AM

alaimacerc wrote: »

Jealous, much?

Look at it this way: it's easier on the ol' BB DB than all of us posting the same message every time saying "you're right, DQ is still an eejit, PM is still a troll, and RKK still keeps making leaden-footed attempts to deflect away from the issues, raising ever more tangential sidetracks, and failing to deal with even the most basic followup from his own rapidly-crashing kite-flying exercises."

And... why? And what brings on this sudden urge to share this thought?

Jealous of what, people who share the same opinion? it is starting to look like a support group, that is all.

Abortion was mentioned by another poster, so I was just curious.

RobertKK · 07-02-2014 02:54AM

Doctor Jimbob wrote: »

Fantastic stuff. Any chance of a comment on the actual topic of the thread though?

Have I not the right to reply to somebody, or do I need your permission now?

alaimacerc · 07-02-2014 02:56AM

RobertKK wrote: »

Most abortions have nothing to do with health problems, but you and others can choose specific cases and apply them to all and believe that every Irish woman who went abroad for an abortion had health problems and wanted to bring her unborn home.

Except that's not at all what I said or did. I specifically asked you to comment on the exceptions. And you utterly failed so to do.

Yet again, as I've said, you're raising off-topic issues, and then failing even to follow through on the most basic of reasoning about your own red herring.

Jimoslimos · 07-02-2014 02:57AM

Piliger wrote: »

It's one of those terms that immediately expose the real feelings of those who use it. The language used by homophones when they talk about anyone who is not straight gives them away without any need to express their 'views'.

I think the I own a inn statute is homophonic.

seenitall · 07-02-2014 02:59AM

No

RobertKK wrote: »

Jealous of what, people who share the same opinion? it is starting to look like a support group, that is all.

We are hardly a support group - you just happen to be in a minority on this thread.

So... tell me more about how it feels?

alaimacerc · 07-02-2014 03:00AM

RobertKK wrote: »

Jealous of what, people who share the same opinion? it is starting to look like a support group, that is all.

I'll pencil you in as a "yes", then. Rather heavily, and I don't have an eraser to hand, either. It's fairly laughable you even raise the matter. This your latest attempt at a silencing tactic? "You and your fellow travellers thanking each other! I feel oppressed and discriminated against!"

Abortion was mentioned by another poster, so I was just curious.

Curious as to how far you can drag the thread off-topic before the mods whap you for it, at which point you can claim "oppression"? (Perhaps not, but then, I can't help but think of Fr. Ned's "contributions".)

RobertKK · 07-02-2014 03:01AM

alaimacerc wrote: »

Except that's not at all what I said or did. I specifically asked you to comment on the exceptions. And you utterly failed so to do.

Yet again, as I've said, you're raising off-topic issues, and then failing even to follow through on the most basic of reasoning about your own red herring.

I did not bring abortion up, and you only partly quoted my post leaving out where I did comment on the exceptions.

This is where abortion was raised:

seenitall wrote: »

My mother recently voted No to gay marriage in the referendum in my country of origin. When I asked her why she voted that way, the response was "I am Catholic", and then the usual about God-man-woman and "they can have something called something else, but not MARRIAGE". I didn't bother talking any more than that, it was after the fact anyway, and I don't have the best of relationships with her in the first place.

My brother voted for the inclusion, though, and I would hope that, like the abortion here, it is at least somewhat a matter of biological, eh, 'turnover' in the population.

Sadly, the referendum affirmed my country as backward and nearer to Russia than France ideologically. Siht.

I think Ireland will change things for itself, though.

RobertKK · 07-02-2014 03:05AM

alaimacerc wrote: »

I'll pencil you in as a "yes", then. Rather heavily, and I don't have an eraser to hand, either. It's fairly laughable you even raise the matter. This your latest attempt at a silencing tactic? "You and your fellow travellers thanking each other! I feel oppressed and discriminated against!"

Curious as to how far you can drag the thread off-topic before the mods whap you for it, at which point you can claim "oppression"? (Perhaps not, but then, I can't help but think of Fr. Ned's "contributions".)

Yes ok, if it keeps you happy, even if it not the case but it seems to have upset you that I mentioned it.
I am sorry, didn't know you were so sensitive.

I was compared to David Quinn of the Iona Institude, how could it be off topic then?

seenitall · 07-02-2014 03:06AM

No

Doctor Jimbob wrote: »

Ok. But everyone else wants to drop it and get back to the issue at hand.

No one more than myself. I didn't mean to derail the thread when I shared a bit of my experience and feelings on the general state of things.

Shoulda known better.

alaimacerc · 07-02-2014 03:10AM

seenitall wrote: »

No one more than myself. I didn't mean to derail the thread when I shared a bit of my experience and feelings on the general state of things.

Shoulda known better.

I don't think you did at all. You mentioned it tangentially; Bob of the Ks made a complete conversational right-angled-turn where he made no attempt to address the point he was supposedly replying to (as seems to be the case more often than not), and basically just said "So, all ye liberal feckers having the audacity to be thanking each other. Probably support abortion, too!"

In US courtroom dramas I think they like to call this an "opening the door" argument. Seems an intensely thin one, though.

seenitall · 07-02-2014 03:12AM

No

Doctor Jimbob wrote: »

You made the mistake of thinking logically when dealing with illogical people :pac:

Ah in fairness, I really should have known I'd be seen as a siht stirrer in these circumstances. The mere whiff of the A word is like a red rag to a bull with some.

If it makes anyone feel any better, I do not plan on aborting any babies any time soon, so it'd be great if everyone just went back to the topic at hand.

RobertKK · 07-02-2014 03:12AM

Doctor Jimbob wrote: »

You made the mistake of thinking logically when dealing with illogical people :pac:

Logic would suggest one would see it was not I who brought abortion up, and then have people being illogical blaming me for it.

RobertKK · 07-02-2014 03:15AM

seenitall wrote: »

Ah in fairness, I really should have known I'd be seen as a siht stirrer in these circumstances. The mere whiff of the A word is like a red rag to a bull with some.

If it makes anyone feel any better, I do not plan on aborting any babies any time soon, so it'd be great if everyone just went back to the topic at hand.

I will say sorry to you.

I just feel I shouldn't be the one who was blamed for bringing it up, and I had no problem with you bringing it up. I was just curious about attitudes and was there any correlation in liberal attitudes between the two subjects - being pro-SSM and pro-choice.

Anyway good night to all.

seenitall · 07-02-2014 03:18AM

No

RobertKK wrote: »

I will say sorry to you.

I just feel I shouldn't be the one who was blamed for bringing it up, and I had no problem with you bringing it up. I was just curious about attitudes and was there any correlation in liberal attitudes between the two subjects - being pro-SSM and pro-choice.

Anyway good night to all.

Good night, sweet prince...

P_1 · 07-02-2014 03:21AM

No

RobertKK wrote: »

I will say sorry to you.

I just feel I shouldn't be the one who was blamed for bringing it up, and I had no problem with you bringing it up. I was just curious about attitudes and was there any correlation in liberal attitudes between the two subjects - being pro-SSM and pro-choice.

Anyway good night to all.

There might well be some correlation but to be honest that would probably only end up with generalising and pigeon holing left right and center.

K-9 · 07-02-2014 03:34AM

Jernal wrote: »

Ah but don't you see the correlation. The number of openly gay people in this country increases. The laws on them relax. Now we've got really bad weather, abortion on demand and economic recession!

Clearly, you cannot give gheys rights. Although, now if we're being honest, this all was set in motion when women were given the right to vote and were no longer confined to not knowing the meaning of the offside rule.

In fairness giving women the right to vote was a terrible idea., look where it led us, feminists and stuff like that.

It's like people who oppose labour rights legislation, big business oppose the very existence of minimum wage now, never mind raising it.

They opposed abolishing child labour then because it was a huge cost to business! A recurrent theme. You also can't give Northern Irish Catholics the vote. Giving a minority a vote usually means a very fortunate group giving up some rights.

Funny how terriers are such a popular breed of dog, bred to catch rats in textile factories as they are so fast and agile. Rats got attracted to linen factories so the solution was, train a dog to deal with it, took a century or so to abolish child labour.

It's amazing how we think we are so advanced, but are actually quite stupid with the passage of time!

alaimacerc · 07-02-2014 03:40AM

K-9 wrote: »

In fairness giving women the right to vote was a terrible idea., look where it led us, feminists and stuff like that.

Obviously a cabalist plot between British Tories and US Democrats to increase their respective electabilities!

JackF1 · 07-02-2014 04:04AM

No

I was surprised to read some of the articles on Iona's website though certainly (in my learned opinion) perhaps a little light academically was not in fact complete and utter tripe!

However as a gay man. Yes I think this organisation is homophobic. I am perfectly capable both physically, financially and mentally to raise a child, maintain a home and remain a stable loving relationship.

I refuse to believe that the moral decline brought on by my sexual orientation is what will break society. Society is already on its way and I can tell you my fellow gays had nothing to do with it.

Potential reasons?
People feeling the need to get married owing to peer pressure and choosing the wrong partner!
Allowing domestic abuse (mostly non physical I would say) continue.
Many men continuing their childhoods into adulthood.
Rising living costs resulting in two incomes being necessary to put food on the table.
Parents not disciplining and nurturing their children.

Do you think the Iona Institute are homophobic?

Comments